ORDER Hon'ble Prafulla C. Pant (Oral): Heard learned counsel for the' petitioner. 2. Learned Government Advocate accepts notices on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2. He prays for and is allowed three weeks' time to file the counter affidavit. 3. Notices on behalf of respondent No. 3 Lalit Kumar Goswami are accepted by Mr. Pawan Mishra, Advocate, who also prays for and is allowed three weeks' time to file the counter affidavit. 4. Also, heard on stay application. 5. The first information report appears to have been lodged under order dated 13-11-2007 (copy Annexure9 to the writ petition), passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun in Misc. Case No. 271 of 2007, under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which was registered as case Crime No. 444 of 2007, relating to offences punishable under Section 420, 506 of I.P.C. registered with Police Station Kotwali, District Dehradun. 6. From the first information report it is dear that admittedly the complainant (respondent No.3) obtained a loan from the ICICI bank. It is argued on behalf of the petitioner that on receiving notice for recovery , from the bank, respondent No. 3 lodged this first information report not only against the petitioner, who is Collection Manager of the ICICI bank, but also against the Chairman and Managing Director of ICICI hank, who are posted at Baroda and Mumbai, respectively. It is further contended that ingredients of the 'offences alleged against accused are not made out from the contents of the first information report. Having perused the papers on record and after considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, prima facie, we are of the view that it is case of abuse of process of law not only on the part of the complainant (respondent No.3) but also on the part of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun. 7. It is pertinent to mention here that the respondent No.3 appears to have earlier filed a criminal complaint against the same accused persons and said complaint has been rejected vide order dated 30-06-2007, passed in Complaint Case No. 2595 of 2007, by Special Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun, as is clear from Annexure No. 3 and 4to the writ petition. 8. 7. It is pertinent to mention here that the respondent No.3 appears to have earlier filed a criminal complaint against the same accused persons and said complaint has been rejected vide order dated 30-06-2007, passed in Complaint Case No. 2595 of 2007, by Special Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun, as is clear from Annexure No. 3 and 4to the writ petition. 8. In the circumstances, as an interim measure, the arrest of the petitioner is hereby stayed during the period of investigation in connection with Crime No. 444 of 2007, relating to offences punishable under Section 420, 506 of I.P.C. registered with Police Station Kotwali, District Dehradun. 9. List this writ petition after the counter affidavits are filed. 10. The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the District Judge, Dehradun, and also place one copy before the Registrar General of the Court, for their perusal.